I don’t understand why the attacks on NATO and ISAF soldiers by members of the Afghan Army are called “green-on-blue” attacks. Given the colour of the uniforms, shouldn’t they be called “blue-on-green” attacks?
Now I understand why it was so easy to find a beautiful and affordable apartment when I moved to Lithuania: The population of Lithuania is shrinking. It has fallen below 3 million, meaning that this cute little country has lost half a million people in 10 years.
That is a population loss of 14 % within a decade. In relative terms, more Lithuanians have left Lithuania than Iraqis or Afghans have fled their countries in the same time. And these two countries had war, civil war, the Taliban, terrorism, bombings, IEDs, drone strikes, suicide killings. Lithuania is a peaceful (and beautiful) country in the European Union.
Let’s hope that a country with such dire demographics will be very, very welcoming to newcomers like me!
In the country that gave us Hollywood, it won’t come as a surprise that actors weigh in on the upcoming Presidential election. And I don’t even mean Clint Eastwood.
First, Chuck Norris (plus wife). We haven’t heard from him in a long time. After watching this video, you may wish it had remained so.
“Our country may be lost forever” and they “… watch our country go the way of socialism or something much worse“. Which country are they in? If that wasn’t the decoratively applied star-spangled banner in their dressing room, one could think they have moved to North Korea or Venezuela. Mr and Mrs Norris, have you ever been to a socialist country? Did you notice the 1,000 differences with America? No, but you came up with something else that involved the number 1,000 because you warn us: “We will defend for our children this last best hope for man on earth or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness.”
Mr and Mrs Norris, are you fucking serious?? “A thousand years of darkness” if President Obama is re-elected? And yet, even with that dreadful threat on the horizon, you still only tell people to vote against President Obama, but can’t bring it over yourselves to call for a vote for Mitt Romney. You must be really convinced that Mitt Romney is the best candidate the Republican Party has.
Let’s see who will step up for the Democrats: First, Democrats had Scarlett Johansson, Kerry Washington and Eva Longoria speak at their convention, whom you may prefer over Mr Eastwood or you may not. That’s a matter of taste.
The direct competition against Chuck Norris is Samuel L Jackson:
I probably don’t even need to tell you which of these two videos I like much more.
I love finding chestnuts. Whenever I spot one or two in the forest, it gives me joy and I pick them up. But today, on the way from my home in Vilnius to the supermarket, I found more than I had ever hoped for. I had to stop picking them up because my pants’ pockets were sagging to the ground, drawing me with them and into a less than flattering appearance.
How much happiness can come from little things!
But now I have too many. What do to with them? Does anybody have some interior design ideas? Or better yet, an interior designer herself? – If not, I may have to use them for military purposes.
(C) for the photos: Andreas Moser, 24 September 2012
To bridge the gap until the next James Bond film, the latest Jason Bourne adventure seemed like the perfect film at the perfect time. “The Bourne Legacy” is Bourne IV. I expected a lot as Bourne I through III were quite good. To come out with the verdict straight away, Bourne IV can’t live up to the expectations.
This is not the actors’ fault, they are actually what makes the film viewable. Jeremy Renner who had introduced himself into the action genre convincingly in “Mission Impossible IV” plays the main character, which confusingly is not Jason Bourne. In fact, there is no Jason Bourne at all in this movie. Other great actors in the film are Rachel Weisz, Edward Norton, Zeljko Ivanek.
“Hold on,” you’re asking, “a Bourne film without Jason Bourne?” Yes. And that’s the film’s problem. The plot is a rehashed version of everything we already know: a secret government programme to physically enhance spies. Again, it is about a spy who is trying to find out what is going on, the agency wants to kill him, he needs to survive and he finds other spies of the same program on the way. Nothing new.
This was interesting in the beginning and it could only carry three movies because there were the (three) thrilling books by Robert Ludlum. But now the story has run its course. If the Bourne franchise wants to carry on – as it should, because the films are well made – it needs to work on the story. I am happy to help with my ideas and my own experience from the murky world of espionage. Universal Pictures, please feel free to contact me.
The action sequences were quite good. With the exception of the initial drone strike in Alaska, they look absolutely real, not like this awful computer stuff which has been creeping into too many action films. (The worst thing that has been happening to my beloved James Bond franchise.) The action sequence in Manila was too obviously modelled on the initial chase scene in Madagascar in “James Bond: Casino Royale”, as well as on the chase in Saigon in “James Bond: Tomorrow Never Dies”.
And then there is one criticism which I finally have to make, although I could almost equally make it about any other action film of the past years: it is NOT exciting to watch CIA agents snoop through e-mails, satellite images, data from passport controls and CCTV footage. This is nothing new. It was exciting and thrilling in “Enemy of the State“, but that was in 1998. We have seen it a hundred times and we believe you that satellites can do everything. There is no need to include this in EVERY film until eternity.
Since 2008 or 2009, I have heard the expression “worst recession since the Great Depression” more times than banks have asked for another bailout. I got tired and fed up by that constantly repeated statement because as little as I know about the Great Depression, I know that it was grim. The current “financial crisis” ain’t nothing in comparison.
To get a feeling for what the Great Depression was like, I turned to a work of fiction. Not any work of fiction, but one which John Steinbeck wrote based on actual research during the Great Depression: “The Grapes of Wrath”.
By the second chapter, I was completely gripped already. The description and the development of the characters, their slang, the harsh material environment, the close-knit family holding together, the destitution, it all comes to life. This book is better than any film could be.
The book follows the Joad family, a family of farmers in Oklahoma who had their land repossessed by the bank after the Dust Bowl and a bad harvest. Tom Joad, one of the sons, just got out of prison and when he comes home, his folks are gone. They didn’t bother to write and tell him about their plan to go to California, but he catches up with them in time. The whole family, three generations, get on a truck and drive westward. They are not the only ones, and lacking food, money, fuel, it’s not an easy journey. They lose some of their family members on the road, some due to death, some due to desertion. The fatalism with which the parents accept that one of their sons won’t join them anymore symbolizes that the parents don’t have the strength to convince their son to stick with them, because they themselves don’t know what will await them and are already losing hope. Once in California, after many losses and sacrifices, it is not the promised land, but a land of exploitation. A few orchards can pick among hundreds of thousands of laborers. Wages are not even minimum but minimal.
“Grapes of Wrath” is not only a dramatic yet exemplary story of one family. It touches on philosophical concepts about the nature of corporations, about belief, about collectivism and community.
When the farmers are driven off their land by a tractor driver hired by the bank, the farmers first think about killing the tractor driver or whoever is responsible.
We’re sorry. It’s not us. It’s the monster. The bank isn’t like a man.
Yes, but the bank is only made of men.
No, you’re wrong there – quite wrong there.The bank is something else than men. It happens that every man in the bank hates what the bank does, and yet the bank does it. The bank is something more than men, I tell you. It’s the monster. Men made it, but they can’t control it.
The tenants cried, Grampa killed Indians, Pa killed snakes for the land. Maybe we can kill banks – they are worse than Indians and snakes.
But soon, the farmers and the tractor driver engage in a discussion about banks and corporations.
[tractor driver:] “It’s not me. There’s nothing I can do. I’ll lose my job if I don’t do it. And look – suppose you kill me? They’ll just hang you, but long before you’re hung there’ll be another guy on the tractor, and he’ll bump the house down. You’re not killing the right guy.”
“That’s so,” the tenant said. “Who gave you orders? I’ll go after him. He’s the one to kill.”
“You’re wrong. He got his orders from the bank.”
“Well, there’s a president of the bank. There’s a board of directors. I’ll fill up the magazine of the rifle and go into the bank.”
The driver said, “Fellow was telling me the bank got orders from the East.”
“But where does it stop? Who can we shoot? I don’t aim to starve to death before I kill the man that’s starving me.”
“Grapes of Wrath” offers a roller-coaster of emotions, from witty dialogues to dramatic poverty to the genial warmth within the family. Another very memorable quote, in the context of one poor family helping another poor family out:
“If you’re in trouble, or hurt or need – go to the poor people. They’re the only ones that’ll help – the only ones.”
About religion:
“Don’t you love Jesus?’ Well, I thought an’ I thought an’ finally I says, ‘No, I don’t know nobody name’ Jesus. I know a bunch of stories, but I only love people.”
About death:
Death was a friend, and sleep was Death’s brother.
About fear, choices and courage:
Tom grinned. “It don’t take no nerve to do somepin when there ain’t nothin’ else you can do.”
The characters with their unique slang and the wisdom behind it will grow dear to your heart. You won’t be able to stop reading. “Grapes of Wrath” will make you laugh out loud at times, shudder at others, and if the ending doesn’t make you cry, then you are not human. An unforgettable book.
Links:
The National Geographic Photo Contest 2012 is open.
The section “who may enter” of the rules includes the following list of countries whose residents are barred from participating:
Contest is open only to individuals who have reached the age of majority in their jurisdiction of residence at the time of entry and who do NOT reside in Cuba, Iran, New Jersey, North Korea, the Province of Quebec, Sudan, Syria or Vermont.
Now, I have gotten used to Cuba, Iran, North Korea and Syria being excluded from anything that originates from America. But what the heck did the people of New Jersey, Vermont and Quebec do to warrant this special treatment? Have they harboured terrorists? Do they stockpile biological weapons? What is going on that has escaped my watchful eyes?
I have been struggling with myself for a long time whether I shall post the unspeakable, disgusting, inflammatory hate video which has lead to the riots in the Middle East and North Africa.
I have already pointed out the irony I see in attacks against embassies and murder being used as ways to express protest against the allegation of belonging to an uncivilized and violent religion. I have also proven on other occasions that I value freedom of speech even if it that speech consists of extremely bad taste. On the other hand, not everything which is allowed to be shown has to be shown, especially not by me.
But meanwhile, especially after noticing that most of the protesters on the “Arab street” have not even seen the film “Innocence of Muslims”, I think it has become necessary to watch at least the following trailer of it in order to be able to participate in the discussion. Here you go:
Hm. Not even that bad, this film.
(Es gibt auch eine deutsche Version dieses Artikels, mit deutschsprachigem Video.)
I noticed that I receive many e-mails with the same questions, so I have started to post the most frequent questions – and of course the answers to them – for everyone to read. For free, can you believe that?! As this section might already answer many of your questions, I invite you to browse these FAQ before you contact me (or any other lawyer) about your case.
Before asking a new question, please read through the many comments which may already answer your questions. And if you find these FAQ useful or if you ask a new question, it would be very nice of you to support this blog. Thank you!
1. When does German child custody law apply?
German law applies whenever a child has its habitual residence in Germany.
The citizenship of the child and/or the parents is irrelevant.
2. If the parents are married, who has child custody? Does the father or the mother have stronger rights?
If the parents are married, they both have joint or shared custody. Both father and mother enjoy exactly the same rights. The same applies if the parents were not married when the child was born but they get married later (§ 1626 I no. 2 BGB).
3. Can we have joint or shared custody if we are not married?
Yes. You just need to sign a declaration of shared custody (§ 1626 I no. 1 BGB). You can already sign this declaration before the birth of the child (§ 1626 b II BGB), but it needs to be signed in front of a government or consular official (§ 1626 d I BGB).
4. What are my rights as the father if I am not married to the mother and she refuses to sign a declaration of shared custody?
There has finally been a change in the child custody law in May 2013 and unmarried fathers can now petition the Family Court for an order of joint custody. This petition can only be denied if the court believes that joint custody is not in the best interest of the child.
5. What happens in the case of a divorce?
Usually and in many cases: nothing. Unless one of the parents petitions the court for a custody decision, the court will not even wade into the minefield of child custody. In that case, the parents will continue to have shared custody even after the separation and the divorce.
I generally recommend to try this route as it spares the child te necessity to appear in court and testify. (On a personal note, both my parents continued to have shared custody for me when they divorced, so that I never had to go attend court during their divorce. I am thankful for that.)
6. Which factors will the court consider when deciding about custody?
The court will apply two tests: (1) Is it in the interest of the child to end the shared custody of both parents and (2) which parent’s custody is in the better interest of the child?
If there is any chance that the parents can still cooperate (as parents, not as spouses) in the future, the court may not wish to award custody to one of them at all, but will instead maintain shared custody. This is also an important factor to keep in mind if you find yourself in a custody dispute. If you know that you are not likely to win the direct contest in the eyes of the court (typically if you are the father of a very young child), you can petition for shared custody being maintained. If you are very cooperative, the court will have a hard time taking away custody from you completely.
If the court needs to make a decision between both parents, it will consider who is better suited to take care of the child, who has been the overwhelming caretaker in the past, who has more time (hence the preference for non-working mothers in many cases), and who will be more cooperative towards the other parent (especially regarding visitation and contact and information). With increasing age of the child, the child’s wishes will also be considered.
7. What is the “Jugendamt”?
The Jugendamt is not part of the court system, but a government agency supposed to take care of children and teenagers if their welfare is in danger or their interests are at stake. It can be compared to Cafcass in the UK or Child & Youth Services in other countries.
In a custody dispute, the court will always involve the Jugendamt and ask them to speak to the parents and the children, make house calls and prepare a report with recommendations. While these recommendations are not binding, in reality the judge will often follow them. In light of this, it is especially sad that the Jugendamt has a very bad track record when it comes to dealing with parents who don’t live in Germany. I have seen many cases myself in which the Jugendamt didn’t even bother to contact the foreign parent.
8. Can the government take away my children?
In extreme cases, yes (§§ 1666, 1666 a BGB).
If the government thinks that your child’s welfare is in danger, it can order the removal of your child from the family as a last resort. However, you can of course challenge this in court. Very often, these decisions by the Jugendamt are overturned by the Family Court because the petitioner can show that the government did not exhaust all other possible options before taking this drastic measure.
9. What happens once my child turns 18?
Once your child turns 18, it is no longer a child in the legal sense. Custody law no longer applies. Your child is a free person.
You may still have to pay child support, though, but that’s a topic for a different set of FAQ.
10. I don’t like any of this. Can I just take my child and leave Germany?
That depends on whether you have sole custody and/or if the other parent agrees. If both parents agree, they can always leave Germany with their child or send the child away. If the other parent does not agree, you have to be very careful not to commit an international child abduction.
In any case, before doing something dramatic, it might be clever to contact me for a consultation.
I don’t know much about Islam, but I do appreciate the sense of irony that many of its fans display: They protest against the vile and thoughtless claims that Muslims are an angry, violent and dangerous lot by, well, by turning into an angry, violent and dangerous mob, by burning buildings and by killing people, often including themselves.
This level of irony requires quite some chutzpah. Respect!
The Happy Hermit 